PLENARY

V. THE FAMILY, ITS ROLES, RIGHTS, COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE
(A/CONF.171/PC/L.5)

Confusion regarding the use of family as the basic unit of social
life was resolved by Canada, who proposed language from the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Delegates agreed to use "the
family" in 5.1 (basis for action), instead of "families," provided
that the rest of the chapter remains as negotiated. As was decided
on Wednesday, discussion of [reproductive] in 5.3 (action) was held
in abeyance until resolution is reached in Chapter VII.

VI. POPULATION GROWTH AND STRUCTURE (L.6)

In 6.12 (youth participation in development activities),
"confidentiality and privacy of reproductive health services" was
bracketed. The consensus language used in 7.6 was applied here. The
new language reads: "with the support and guidance of their parents
and in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child."
Throughout Section D (Indigenous People[s]), the "s" is bracketed.
Australia insisted on "peoples," while Canada and others argued
that "people" is accepted UN language. Since there was no
agreement, delegates agreed that the text will remain bracketed
pending Secretariat consultations with a UN working group
addressing this issue.

In 6.27 (needs of persons with disabilities), the phrase
"international migration" was bracketed. The Philippines and
Cameroon argued that limiting the movement of people with
disabilities is discriminatory. The Chair pointed out that this
issue is also addressed in Chapter X (International Migration) and
it should be discussed there.

Delegates accepted new language for 9.7 bis: "Population
distribution policies should be consistent with such international
instruments as, when applicable, the Fourth Geneva Convention
Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
(1949), including Article 49." All other brackets were removed,
with the exception of 9.18 (solutions to the problem of internally
displaced persons). India said that this issue had already been
discussed in 9.17 bis and 9.15 and emphasized that
international measures may jeopardize national sovereignty. The US,
supported by Croatia, Turkey, the Holy See, Guatemala, Pakistan,
Egypt, the EU and Switzerland, asked to delete the brackets around
9.18. It was agreed to bracket reference to national and
international measures instead of the entire paragraph.

X. INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION (L.8)

Paragraph 10.3 (remaining in one's country) initially read as
follows: "to ensure that the [human] rights of [individuals
belonging to] minorities, indigenous people[s] [and political
opponents] are respected." The G-77, China, the Holy See, Hungary
and Canada wanted "human" and "individuals" deleted. The US and the
EU supported their retention. Uganda, Hungary and Canada wanted
"political opponents" retained. The EU and Mali disagreed. Since
there was no convergence on positions, the brackets were retained.
The following was also bracketed in 10.3: "[increased/full] access
to world markets." China and India wanted the term "full;" however,
most delegations preferred "increased." India finally agreed to
accept "increased," with reservations.

In 10.10 (integration of documented migrants), the right of family
reunification was bracketed. The US expressed concern that there is
no definition of the family and proposed "the importance of family
reunification" and removal of the reference to "right." Turkey
ardently supported retaining "right." The brackets remain. In 10.11
(rights of documented migrants), the brackets around "age"
discrimination were removed. In 10.12 (basis for
action--undocumented migrants), the US suggested deletion of "some
economic sectors of receiving countries need migrant labour,"
noting that it had not been discussed by the Working Group and was
better addressed elsewhere. In 10.14 (reducing undocumented
migration), delegates deleted the brackets and amended the text to
read: "including the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries
asylum from persecution." In 10.16 (return and reintegration of
undocumented migrants), the bracketed text "in accordance with
international law" was deleted. In 10.20 (support activities on
behalf of refugees), delegates accepted the EU's proposal to
replace the bracketed text regarding regional and international
mechanisms to promote appropriate shared responsibility. 10.23
(forced migration) remains bracketed, pending consultations.

XII. TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT (L.7)

In 12.7 (basis for action), the Holy See expressed reservations on
the term "contraceptives," and retained brackets around "fertility
regulation," until it is discussed in Chapter VII. Delegates
accepted the EU's proposal to delete the brackets around "barrier
methods." In 12.9 (government support for research), brackets were
removed from the phrase referring to barrier methods against
diseases. In 12.11 (involvement of the private sector), the term
"fertility regulation commodities" was changed to "contraceptive
commodities," with the Holy See's reservation. In 12.15(c)
(objectives), the Holy See agreed to unbracket "sexual and
reproductive behavior."

XIV. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION (L.11)

14.3(a) bis (favorable macroeconomic policies) was
completely bracketed and led to a protracted debate. India reminded
delegates of the brackets it requested around sub-paragraph (e)
(human rights standards). No progress could be made and the Chair
called for further consultations.

In 14.4, 14.10(a), 14.13 and 14.14, the problem of reference to
countries with economies in transition was raised. Argentina
attempted to propose compromise text in 14.13, eliminating the need
for special reference to these countries, but the proposal was
rejected by the Russian Federation. Estonia proposed a new
paragraph on these countries, which was rejected by the G-77. In
14.4 (national capacity-building), the Holy See deleted one set of
brackets and added another. The text now reads: "including
information and education of [family planning programmes]." In 14.6
(international funding and cooperation), the EU agreed to remove
the brackets around the phrase on transfer of technology. In 14.8
(basis for action), there are still problems with increasing ODA
for population programmes. The G-77's original proposal (...to
increase their contribution from 2% of ODA to 4%), remains in
brackets at the EU's request. In 14.10(b) (objective), the EU
requested brackets around "while ensuring no reduction in the
resources available for other development areas." The US and the EU
proposed compromise texts, but the G-77 insisted on retaining the
brackets.

The figures on resource flows from donor countries in 14.11 is
bracketed because they are derived from bracketed figures in
Chapter XIII. Norway proposed new language derived from UNICEF's
statement in the morning about devoting 20% of ODA funds to meeting
such priority needs in basic education and primary health care.
Australia and the EU requested brackets. Norway agreed to withdraw
the amendment since it would, in effect, reopen the entire
paragraph for negotiation.

In 14.14, India said that the text should always read "population
and development" to be consistent with the heading of this
section. This was accepted. Tunisia proposed a new paragraph 14.15
bis on innovative financing for population and development
programmes.

XI. POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION, EDUCATION AND
COMMUNICATION (L.12)

In 11.1 (basis for action), the brackets were removed and new
language proposed by the US was adopted. It now reads "At the most
basic level more adequate and appropriate information is conducive
to informed and responsible decision-making concerning health,
sexual and reproductive behavior, family life and patterns of
production and consumption." In this particular instance, the Holy
See unbracketed "sexual and reproductive behavior." In 11.2
(information and behavioral change), Barbados proposed new text
that reads: "Indeed this begins with the recognition that decisions
must freely and responsibly be made on the number and spacing of
children and in all other aspects of life, including sexual and
reproductive behavior." The EU wanted time to examine this proposal
before accepting it. In 10.5(b) (objective), the Holy See
unbracketed the word "reproduction." Brackets in 11.4, 11.6 and
11.9 remained until the discussion on Chapters XII and XIII. The
Chair asked for submission of written alternatives for 11.5(d)
(objective) and 11.11 (interpersonal communication). Although 11.7
(the role of leaders) was not bracketed, the US questioned the
phrase "specialists of recognized morality." Brazil and Colombia
implored Honduras, who had originally proposed this phrase, to
reconsider it.